tag:tagteam.harvard.edu,2005:/hubs/oatp/user/frankhellwig/atom 2023-12-22T09:33:27-05:00 TagTeam social RSS aggregrator tag:tagteam.harvard.edu,2005:FeedItem/9374921 2023-12-22T09:33:27-05:00 2023-12-22T09:33:27-05:00

<div> <p>Researchers at all of the participating organizations of the Bibsam Consortium will be able to publish in all journals from the publishers Frontiers and PLOS without charge, for either author or university.</p> </div> <div> <div> </div> <div> <p>As a result of <a href="https://www-kb-se.translate.goog/samverkan-och-utveckling/nytt-fran-kb/nyheter-samverkan-och-utveckling/2023-10-25-finansiarer-i-gemensam-satsning-pa-oppen-tillgang.html?_x_tr_sl=sv&amp;_x_tr_tl=en&amp;_x_tr_hl=en-US&amp;_x_tr_pto=wapp">the research financiers' strategic decision to jointly finance publication with publishers that only publish fully open access journals,</a> two new Bibsam agreements have been signed with the publishers Frontiers and PLOS respectively. ...</p> </div> </div> <p> </p>

tag:tagteam.harvard.edu,2005:FeedItem/9374920 2023-12-22T09:33:08-05:00 2023-12-22T09:33:08-05:00

tag:tagteam.harvard.edu,2005:FeedItem/3060397 2021-06-04T13:03:19-04:00 2021-06-04T13:03:19-04:00

<p>... The role will provide the suitable candidate with an excellent opportunity to work in a thriving and international environment at the forefront of the transition of scientific publishing to Open Access. Our office is located in London, however remote working options are available for candidates across the UK.</p> <p>Key Responsibilities</p> <p>Taking care of processes and relationships regarding existing member organizations, including: ... Supporting the forming of new membership collaborations, including: ...</p>

tag:tagteam.harvard.edu,2005:FeedItem/3060395 2021-06-04T12:58:30-04:00 2021-06-04T12:58:30-04:00

<p>8 June 2021 – 14.00 to 15.30 CEST This third webinar of the series "Universities and the future of scholarly publishing" will look into the ins and outs of the different types of transformative agreements with large and small publishers. It will also explore their potential to flip scholarly publishing to Open Access. The scholarly publishing sector is experiencing a transition to new forms of business models, with traditional subscription big deals being increasingly replaced with so-called transformative agreements. This is accompanied by a push through policies such as Plan S. Building on the results of the study on future scenarios for scholarly publishing, this EUA webinar takes stock of these changes. It will focus on the risks and opportunities as the sector moves towards a combination of publishing and subscription agreements. In detail, participants will discuss the fields of diversity and competition, affordability, as well as the sustainable operation of smaller publishers. Particular attention will be paid to the implications for universities and consortia and how they can navigate the transition. Registrations are now open. The webinar is free of charge and open to anyone interested, including all EUA members, leadership from other universities and libraries, leaders in scholarly communication and publishing and those interested in Open Access. Registrations will remain open until the start of the event. Panellists</p> <ul> <li>    Liz Ferguson, Vice President of Open Research, Wiley</li> <li>    Jens-Peter Gaul, Secretary General, German Rectors‘ Conference HRK, for Projekt DEAL</li> <li>    Jack Hyland, Manager, IReL</li> <li>    Stephan Kuster, Head of Institutional Relations, Frontiers</li> <li>    Claire Moulton, Publisher, The Company of Biologists</li> </ul>

tag:tagteam.harvard.edu,2005:FeedItem/2974254 2021-04-20T14:01:38-04:00 2021-06-08T14:38:16-04:00

<p>Abstract:  The German DEAL agreements between German universities and research institutions on the one side and Springer Nature and Wiley on the other side facilitate easy open access publishing for researchers located in Germany. We use a dataset of all publications in chemistry from 2016 to 2020 and apply a difference-in-differences approach to estimate the impact on eligible scientists’ choice of publication outlet. We find that even in the short period following the conclusion of these DEAL agreements, publication patterns in the field of chemistry have changed, as eligible researchers have increased their publications in Wiley and Springer Nature journals at the cost of other journals. From that two related competition concerns emerge: First, academic libraries may be, at least in the long run, left with fewer funds and incentives to subscribe to non-DEAL journals published by smaller publishers or to fund open access publications in these journals. Secondly, eligible authors may prefer to publish in journals included in the DEAL agreements, thereby giving DEAL journals a competitive advantage over non-DEAL journals in attracting good papers. Given the two-sided market nature of the academic journal market, these effects may both further spur the concentration process in this market.</p> <p> </p>

tag:tagteam.harvard.edu,2005:FeedItem/2786316 2020-10-06T11:55:29-04:00 2020-10-06T11:55:29-04:00

<p>...we’ll provide an overview and Q&amp;A session about PLOS’ new collective action model, PLOS Community Action Publishing (CAP), designed for our highly selective journals PLOS Medicine and PLOS Biology. We will host two sessions of the webinar on Oct 26, 2020 at 10:00 AM ET  and October 28, 2020 at 12 PM ET. ... This webinar is first-come-first-served for library and consortia representatives</p>

tag:tagteam.harvard.edu,2005:FeedItem/2786315 2020-10-06T11:51:16-04:00 2020-10-06T11:51:16-04:00

<p>Seattle, Washington, United States, Full time</p> <p>Reporting to the Institutional Memberships Manager (based in London, UK), this role will play a crucial role in expanding Frontiers’ Institutional Memberships Program by establishing, developing, and maintaining collaborations with universities and other research organisations in the US. The role will provide the suitable candidate with an excellent opportunity to work in a thriving and international environment at the forefront of the transition of scientific publishing to Open Access.</p>

tag:tagteam.harvard.edu,2005:FeedItem/2786264 2020-10-06T11:24:29-04:00 2020-10-06T11:24:29-04:00

<p>Abstract (Google Translate (original slides &amp; abstract in German)):</p> <p>The open access transformation in Germany has gained momentum through the conclusion of contracts with an open access component. It continues to require adjustments to the financing structures and with greater urgency, as well as greater transparency about the funds that are spent on Open Access.</p> <p>The adaptation of the financing structures must take place at all levels in order to create an efficient and transparent overall system in the area of ​​publishing. The recording of costs should cover all funds used for publications, including traditional publication fees.</p> <p>At the same time, the focus should not be narrowed to the open access models, which incur publication fees for individual contributions. The variety of financing models should be retained and expanded further.</p> <p>The DFG plans to set up a limited funding program starting in 2021, with which universities and non-university research institutions can raise funds for open access publication costs. All formats are supported: in addition to research articles, also books and preprints. It serves as a transition to a polluter pays principle, also in the area of ​​the funds required for Open Access. This program is supplemented by a program for the funding of infrastructures, in which above all Open Access infrastructures and the further formation of structures for Open Access are promoted. The lecture will present motives and details of the future funding of open access publication costs. The complementary program “Infrastructures for Scientific Publishing” will also be presented in this session.</p>

tag:tagteam.harvard.edu,2005:FeedItem/2786260 2020-10-06T11:14:55-04:00 2020-10-06T11:14:55-04:00

<p>Particularly disturbing is the fact that a 4-year contract was signed right away. Why not start with a 1-2 year contract in order to gain experience and to be able to correct any undesirable developments, like those which now come apparent? Now, swissuniversities has given up all its trump cards for four years and may soon have to advertise hybrid OA Elsevier if the publication volume does not develop as anticipated. It would actually be desirable if fewer Swiss authors were to publish in hybrid journals from Elsevier, but in genuine Open Access journals. The signal that this agreement sends out to genuine Gold Open Access publishers is also fatal. Without a public call for tenders, Elsevier has been awarded a mega-contract, while those publishers who have actually been striving for OA for years and can deliver it more cheaply will be left out in the cold.</p> <p>With a PAR fee of over 4500 EUR, the price level is already extremely high, which once <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.240896">again</a> shows that OA in Switzerland does not fail because of the lack of money.</p> <p>The money has now been used to buy 30% OA from Elsevier. But for the <a href="https://www.swissuniversities.ch/fileadmin/swissuniversities/Dokumente/Hochschulpolitik/Open_Access/Open_Access_strategy_final_e.pdf">100% that swissuniversities wants to achieve by 2024</a>, a lot still has to happen.</p>

tag:tagteam.harvard.edu,2005:FeedItem/2786259 2020-10-06T11:03:16-04:00 2020-10-06T11:03:16-04:00

<p>One issue common to the recent read-and-publish agreements is that substituting APCs for subscriptions shifts the burden of journal financing onto the relatively small fraction of subscribing institutions that are research intensive. ...</p> <p>“It remains to be seen whether ‘publish’ institutions will be able and willing to accept the radical reallocation of costs logically implied by transformative agreements,” notes a <a href="https://infrastructure.sparcopen.org/2020-update/appendix-scholarly-journals">report</a> by the OA advocacy group Scholarly Publishing and Academic Resources Coalition (SPARC).</p> <p>As the number of OA articles in hybrid journals increases, universities and libraries that haven’t negotiated transformative deals question whether to continue to subscribe when much of the content is free. “I call this counting the holes in Swiss cheese,” says Esposito. “Every deal signed lowers the value of ‘read’ subscriptions at all other institutions,” the SPARC report says.</p>

tag:tagteam.harvard.edu,2005:FeedItem/2731422 2020-07-15T06:59:37-04:00 2020-07-15T06:59:37-04:00

<p>Preface  1</p> <p>Management summary  3</p> <p>1 Introduction  5</p> <p>1.1 A study on Read &amp; Publish contracts in the context of a dynamic scholarly publishing system  5</p> <p>1.2 Objectives of the study  6</p> <p>1.3 Methodology used for this study  7</p> <p>1.4 Reading guide  8</p> <p>2 A dynamic scholarly publishing system  9</p> <p>2.1 A two-sided market 9</p> <p>2.2 Transitioning from the traditional subscription-based model 9</p> <p>2.3 Open access modalities  12</p> <p>2.4 Transformative agreements  14</p> <p>2.5 Publishing platforms 17</p> <p>3 Actors in the scholarly publishing system and their main drivers 18</p> <p>3.1 Stakeholders in the context of open access negotiations 18</p> <p>3.2 Authors and readers  18</p> <p>3.3 Negotiating consortia 21</p> <p>3.4 Publishers  22</p> <p>3.5 Research funders  23</p> <p>3.6 Governments  25</p> <p>4 Four scenarios  27</p> <p>4.1 Reference scenario 1: Predominantly subscription-based contracts with delayed OA through</p> <p>repositories after publishing (‘Classical/Green’)  27</p> <p>4.2 Scenario 2: Predominantly Publish &amp; Read contracts (‘P&amp;R/R&amp;P’)  28</p> <p>4.3 Scenario 3: Predominantly contracts for publishing open access through publisher-owned</p> <p>journals or platforms (‘publisher-owned OA platforms’)  28</p> <p>4.4 Scenario 4: Predominantly contracts for publishing open access through community-owned</p> <p>platforms (‘Community-owned OA platforms’)  29</p> <p>5 Differences in implications between the scenarios  31</p> <p>5.1 Methodological note and limitations 31</p> <p>5.2 Impact on academic freedom and the freedom to publish in preferred journals  31</p> <p>5.3 Ability to perform current research(er) performance assessment  32</p> <p>5.4 Service levels of publishers and innovation in research communities 33</p> <p>5.5 Transparency in the market  34</p> <p>Read &amp; Publish contracts in the context of a dynamic scholarly publishing system ii</p> <p>5.6 Effects on the arts, humanities and social sciences  34</p> <p>6 Perceived strengths and weaknesses of hypothetical scenarios  35</p> <p>6.1 Scenario 2: R&amp;P contracts  35</p> <p>6.2 Scenario 3: Publisher-owned OA platforms or journals  37</p> <p>6.3 Scenario 4: Community-owned OA platforms 39</p> <p>7 Potential effects of the hypothetical scenarios on each stakeholder group  42</p> <p>7.1 Authors and readers  42</p> <p>7.2 Negotiating consortia 43</p> <p>7.3 Publishers  44</p> <p>7.4 Funders  46</p> <p>8 Desirability and feasibility of the hypothetical scenarios  47</p> <p>8.1 Scenario 2: Predominantly Publish &amp; Read contracts (‘P&amp;R/R&amp;P’)  47</p> <p>8.2 Scenario 3: Predominantly contracts for publishing open access through publisher-owned</p> <p>journals or platforms (‘Publisher-owned OA platforms’)  47</p> <p>8.3 Scenario 4: Predominantly contracts for publishing open access through community-owned</p> <p>platforms (‘Community-owned OA platforms’)  48</p> <p>9 Overview and main conclusions  50</p> <p>9.1 Open access drivers  50</p> <p>9.2 Implications of R&amp;P contracts 51</p> <p>9.3 Implications of future scenarios for the scholarly publishing system  52</p> <p>9.4 Implications of future scenarios for various stakeholders  52</p> <p>9.5 Desired future, realistic future and likelihood of implementation 53</p> <p>9.6 Schematic overview of scenarios  54</p> <p>9.7 Discussion and reflection  57</p> <p>9.8 Recommendations  58</p> <p>List of abbreviations used  60</p> <p>Consulted stakeholders  61</p> <p>Description of the behavioural model and application to scenarios  64</p> <p>Details on the Delphi surveys  67</p> <p>Scenario summary tables  70</p> <p>Details on contractual conditions  78</p> <p>PESTLE Factors 81</p>

tag:tagteam.harvard.edu,2005:FeedItem/2731421 2020-07-15T06:50:58-04:00 2020-07-15T06:50:58-04:00

<p><span>this role will play a crucial role in expanding Frontiers’ Institutional Memberships Program and provide the suitable candidate with an excellent opportunity to work in a thriving and international environment at the forefront of the transition of scientific publishing to Open Access.</span></p>

tag:tagteam.harvard.edu,2005:FeedItem/2731420 2020-07-15T06:43:24-04:00 2020-07-15T06:43:24-04:00

<p>This report is the result of the <a href="https://eua.eu/101-projects/751-study-on-read-publish-agreements.html">study on Read &amp; Publish agreements</a> commissioned by EUA on behalf of 25 supporting organisations in May 2019. Carried out by Technopolis Group, the report explores the potential implications of ongoing structural changes in the scholarly publishing system.</p> <p>The publication approaches the future of scholarly publishing via a set of four scenarios representing the scholarly publishing system’s “dominant” business models. The findings highlight that traditional subscription publishing is largely undesirable, while Read &amp; Publish agreements are perceived as transitional arrangements. A majority of survey respondents, instead, indicated that two future scenarios – pure Open Access publishing by commercial actors, and community-ran, non-commercial publishing – are the most desirable.</p> <p>Download [91 pages]</p>

tag:tagteam.harvard.edu,2005:FeedItem/2636526 2020-03-12T07:05:36-04:00 2020-03-12T07:05:36-04:00

<p>This is the basis for recent interest in so-called transformative agreements. Based on our assessment  of several such agreements, we argue that they are not genuinely transformative and that their  transformational potential is actually very low. Such models risk perpetuating current limitations on  access, transparency and market competitiveness, while simultaneously facilitating excessive charges  on the public purse. While they permit some legacy publishers to increase the fraction of OA content,  they also increase the number of articles published in hybrid journals, lock subscribers into their current  arrangements with publishers, and do nothing to improve price transparency. If such agreements allow  publishers to continue their current pricing behavior, the long-term cost for libraries, higher education  and research institutions will be much higher than they expect.  So called Transformative Agreements frequently display the following shortcomings:</p> <p>• They lack binding commitments to a full transformation to OA.</p> <p>• Access is limited to selected parts of a publisher’s portfolio.</p> <p>• Conditions vary across national borders.</p> <p>• They crowd-out pure OA publishers from institutional or national agreement negotiations.</p> <p>The signatories of this position statement believe that OA that is delivered in a full, immediate and  transparent (FIT) way by fully OA publishers offers a high-quality, cost-effective alternative to hybrid  models.  We advocate for an "OA first" policy that should make it mandatory to find mechanisms of support for  native OA publications and alternative peer-review platforms first, before entering large-scale  transformative agreements with legacy publishers providing OA coverage or subsidies of OA APCs.</p> <p>The signatories therefore recommend that: ...</p>

tag:tagteam.harvard.edu,2005:FeedItem/2636525 2020-03-12T07:02:50-04:00 2020-03-12T07:02:50-04:00

<p>Over that past decade and longer, pure OA publishers have demonstrated that open science works by having already successfully provided these the services to authors; and policy makers have taken note. Now, in order to support more traditional publishers to change their subscription-based models to OA, a number of so called ‘Transformative Agreements’ – also referred to as ‘Publish and Read’ deals – have been signed between national library consortia and large publishers in recent months.</p> <blockquote> <p>Read the position paper <a href="https://frontiersinblog.files.wordpress.com/2020/03/position-statement-transformative-agreements.pdf">here</a></p> </blockquote> <p> </p> <p>Transformative agreements – if truly transformative – would be an effective instrument to support the transition to OA. But to do so there are key transformative elements that must be present. For an agreement to be considered as “transformative”, it must contain binding conditions or mechanisms that (1) guarantee the full transition to 100% OA within a defined, short timeframe and (2) guarantee that the process cannot be easily reversed or cancelled at the end of the contractual period. The agreement should encompass all the publisher’s titles and include OA to legacy content.</p> <p>... The joint position paper by Copernicus, JMIR, MDPI, Ubiquity Press and Frontiers offers an alternative solution: agreements with publishers that are already fully committed to open science and who offer full, immediate and transparent Open Access.</p>

tag:tagteam.harvard.edu,2005:FeedItem/2635061 2020-03-10T15:10:05-04:00 2020-03-10T15:10:05-04:00

<p>Since the planned 5th OA2020-DE transformation workshop "Local implementation of open access transformation contracts using the example of the DEAL-Wiley contract" this week had to be canceled due to the corona virus, we decided to conduct the planned lectures in the form of a webinar.</p>

tag:tagteam.harvard.edu,2005:FeedItem/2635038 2020-03-10T15:02:25-04:00 2020-03-10T15:02:25-04:00

<div> <div> <div>WEDNESDAY, MARCH 18TH</div> <div>10:00 AM – 11:00 AM EST / EDT</div> </div> </div> <div> <div>The STM publishing landscape is rapidly changing and many scholarly publishers are transitioning to open access by signing transformative agreements with academic institutions that would previously buy traditional journal subscriptions. To create, evaluate and negotiate those agreements, you will need access to really good forward looking and historical data. In this webinar, we will show you how to make your transformative agreement more successful by using Dimensions rich publication and grants data. Looking at robust data surrounding authorship and funding in topical areas by country, geography, institution, and funder, you will learn how to reveal key insights into the current and future state of play for your discipline which will complement your own usage statistics. On top of that, we will show you how researcher data and publication history can be added to give you a 360 degree view which is invaluable in decision making in open access publishing.</div> </div>

tag:tagteam.harvard.edu,2005:FeedItem/2635037 2020-03-10T14:59:24-04:00 2020-03-10T14:59:24-04:00

<p>With almost 55,000 APC data points in our database, we are able to identify emerging trends in pricing. Hybrid prices appear to be holding steady, although – as we predicted this time last year – we see higher charges at the higher end of the market. Meanwhile, the lowest fully OA APCs are getting lower, and there seems to be a downwards move in prices of fully OA journals – a reversal of what we saw last year. It appears that a two-tier market is emerging, with hybrid prices holding their own, and fully OA prices decreasing. ...</p>

tag:tagteam.harvard.edu,2005:FeedItem/2635032 2020-03-10T14:49:10-04:00 2020-03-10T14:49:10-04:00

<p><em>This letter represents US publishing organizations who support a potential White House Executive Order for immediate Open Access to federally funded research and directly addresses some of the prior claims in <a href="https://presspage-production-content.s3.amazonaws.com/uploads/1508/coalitionletteropposinglowerembargoes-864869.pdf?54750">a letter released by AAP</a>. CDL has signed this letter as an open access publisher (eScholarship Publishing). Publishing organizations and scholarly societies who would like to join as additional signatories can reach out to <a href="https://blogs.plos.org/plos/2020/01/plos-joins-other-publishers-and-societies-in-support-of-the-proposed-white-house-policy-regarding-federally-funded-research/">PLOS</a> at <a href="mailto:community@plos.org">community@plos.org</a></em>. <em>To read an earlier response to the AAP letter by Ivy Anderson and Jeff MacKie-Mason, who co-chair UC’s publisher negotiations strategy team, <a href="https://osc.universityofcalifornia.edu/2020/01/ostp-publisher-letter-response/">see last week’s blog post</a>.</em></p> <p>Dear President Trump, ...</p>

tag:tagteam.harvard.edu,2005:FeedItem/2635027 2020-03-10T14:40:25-04:00 2020-03-10T14:40:25-04:00

tag:tagteam.harvard.edu,2005:FeedItem/2635026 2020-03-10T14:38:42-04:00 2020-03-10T14:38:42-04:00

<p>[from Google Translate:]</p> <p>In addition to the participation process, HRK Circular No. 5/2020 also announced the publication of the full text of the contract.</p> <p>The contract can now be found here: https://doi.org/10.17617/2.3174351</p>

tag:tagteam.harvard.edu,2005:FeedItem/2620125 2020-02-19T05:02:02-05:00 2020-02-19T05:02:02-05:00

<p>Google Translate:</p> <p>Both partners signed a Memorandum of Understanding in Jülich yesterday for a new agreement that enables researchers to publish in Frontiers journals with a simplified procedures [...] </p> <p>A key point of the world's largest open access framework agreement is that it is open to all institutions involved in the DEAL project [...] More than 700 publicly and privately financed science and research organizations in Germany [...]</p> <p>As with DEAL, when working with Frontiers, the publication costs are processed through the respective libraries of the participating institutions.</p>

tag:tagteam.harvard.edu,2005:FeedItem/2620122 2020-02-19T04:51:40-05:00 2020-02-19T04:51:40-05:00

tag:tagteam.harvard.edu,2005:FeedItem/2620121 2020-02-19T04:48:33-05:00 2020-02-19T04:48:33-05:00

tag:tagteam.harvard.edu,2005:FeedItem/2620119 2020-02-19T04:46:54-05:00 2020-02-19T04:46:54-05:00

<p>Google Translate: New national agreement with the publisher Frontiers, which is the leader in open publishing, makes it easier for Norwegian researchers to publish in Frontiers' journal. For participants in the agreement, discounts on publishing fees (APC), centralized billing and payment options, as well as support for library staff working with publishing fees are included.</p>

tag:tagteam.harvard.edu,2005:FeedItem/2620116 2020-02-19T04:44:51-05:00 2020-02-19T14:43:50-05:00

<p>Abstract: This paper addresses the topic of the article processing charges (APCs) that are paid when publishing articles using the open access (OA) option. Building on the Elsevier OA price list, company balance sheet figures, and ScienceDirect data, tentative answers to three questions are outlined using a Monte Carlo approach to deal with the uncertainty inherent in the inputs. The first question refers to the level of APCs from the market perspective, under the hypothesis that all the articles published in Elsevier journals exploit the OA model so that the subscription to ScienceDirect becomes worthless. The second question is how much Elsevier should charge for publishing all the articles under the OA model, assuming the profit margin reduces and adheres to the market benchmark. The third issue is how many articles would have to be accepted, in an OA-only publishing landscape, so that the publisher benefits from the same revenue and profit margin as in the recent past. The results point to high APCs, nearly twice the current level, being required to preserve the publisher’s profit margin. Otherwise, by relaxing that constraint, a downward shift of APCs can be expected so they would tend to get close to current values. Accordingly, the article acceptance rate could be likely to grow from 26–27% to about 35–55%.</p>

tag:tagteam.harvard.edu,2005:FeedItem/2584897 2019-12-26T09:57:39-05:00 2019-12-30T12:26:46-05:00

<p>via Google Translate: "...all Swiss universities are now canceling their big deal with Springer Nature (including Nature Journals). As Swissuniversities <a href="https://translate.googleusercontent.com/translate_c?depth=1&amp;rurl=translate.google.com&amp;sl=auto&amp;sp=nmt4&amp;tl=en&amp;u=https://www.swissuniversities.ch/aktuell/swissuniversities-definiert-beziehungen-mit-den-verlagen-elsevier-springer-nature-und-wiley-fuer-2020&amp;xid=25657,15700022,15700186,15700190,15700256,15700259,15700262,15700265,15700271,15700283&amp;usg=ALkJrhjWv7IYNhPx2RrE2828vZbu0H0Ffg">announces</a> , <strong>Springer Nature</strong> was unable to deliver a suitable offer after more than 1.5 years of negotiations. Although negotiations with <strong>Wiley have</strong> also been <strong>ongoing</strong> for a year, Swiss universities are incomprehensibly extending the big deal here without having achieved anything in terms of open access. ..."  </p>

tag:tagteam.harvard.edu,2005:FeedItem/2565143 2019-11-28T04:41:29-05:00 2019-11-28T04:41:29-05:00

<p>Researchers from 180 UK universities can now benefit from a national open access deal agreed between <a href="https://www.jisc.ac.uk/jisc-collections">Jisc Collections</a> and <a href="https://www.frontiersin.org/about/about-frontiers">Frontiers</a>, the second largest fully open access publisher in the UK.</p>

tag:tagteam.harvard.edu,2005:FeedItem/2488820 2019-08-16T09:43:15-04:00 2019-08-16T09:43:15-04:00

<p>Following the recent conclusion of the Strategic Review of the Irish Research e-Library (IReL), the IReL Steering Group have agreed the following principles for negotiating agreements with publishers from 2020, based on the LIBER principles. ...</p> <p>Full details here: https://irel.ie/wp-content/uploads/2019/07/IReL-principles-for-Open-Access-publisher-agreements-from-2020-1.pdf</p>

tag:tagteam.harvard.edu,2005:FeedItem/2488819 2019-08-16T09:40:35-04:00 2019-08-16T09:40:35-04:00

<p><span>Wiley and VIVA, Virginia’s academic library consortium, have announced the signing of an agreement which combines open access publishing funds with their journal subscriptions; the first of its kind in North America. The two-year pilot uses the Wiley Open Access Account solution to allow VIVA researchers to publish in fully gold open access journals using a central fund for article publication charges (APCs).</span></p>

tag:tagteam.harvard.edu,2005:FeedItem/2488818 2019-08-16T09:35:48-04:00 2019-08-16T09:35:48-04:00

<p><span>this role will play a crucial role in expanding Frontiers’ Institutional Memberships Program and provide the suitable candidate with an excellent opportunity to work in a thriving and international environment at the forefront of the transition of scientific publishing to Open Access</span></p>

tag:tagteam.harvard.edu,2005:FeedItem/2488817 2019-08-16T09:32:04-04:00 2019-08-16T09:32:04-04:00

<p><span>In scientific libraries, loan statistics and standardized usage statistics (COUNTER reports) are well-established instruments for the library acquisition management. In the course of the open-access transformation, the collection and usefulness of organization-specific usage reports are called into question ...</span></p>

tag:tagteam.harvard.edu,2005:FeedItem/2488816 2019-08-16T09:28:11-04:00 2019-08-16T09:28:11-04:00

<p><span>The launch of this framework [</span><a href="http://norf-ireland.net/wp-content/uploads/2019/07/NORF_Framework_10_July_2019-2.pdf">http://norf-ireland.net/wp-content/uploads/<span>2019</span>/07/NORF_Framework_10_July_2019-2.pdf</a><span>] is a significant first step in a process which will see the development of a National Action Plan for the transition to an open research environment.</span></p>

tag:tagteam.harvard.edu,2005:FeedItem/2488815 2019-08-16T09:19:57-04:00 2019-08-16T09:19:57-04:00

<p> </p> <p><span><span>Translation by Google Translate (with some human improvement and additions in "[]"): "Here was illuminated ... the main objectives and data sources of the Open Access Monitor (OAM) [Germany; https://open-access-monitor.de]. ... It is planned that the OAM will receive the subscription data of the institutions participating in LAS:eR by means of API retrieval, provided that they actively agree. While the OAM publicly shows aggregated values, e.g. at the federal level, the view on the own subscription costs is always reserved for the participating institutions. … Following the presentation of OpenAPC (Dirk Pieper, UB Bielefeld), which serves as a source for publication costs for OAM, Bernd Oberknapp (UB Freiburg) gave an insight into the National Statistics Server. For all facilities that support the open access transformation process, the counter statistics flowing into the statistics server prove to be valuable - and thus also for the OAM.</span></span> <span><span>In the course of Dirk Pieper's subsequent presentation on BASE, it became clear that there was a great need for information on green OA in the OAM among the workshop participants. In addition, article-related version information could be extracted from BASE, especially as they are much better in quality than those of commercial suppliers. The workshop session on the various data sources was completed with Claudia Frick’s (FZJ) lecture on publication fees which are often collected in addition to APCs (including Color Charges, Submission Fees). It was expressed as a wish to be able to enter these costs into OpenAPC or LAS:eR in the future, for example, in order to create a clearer base for negotiations with publishers. The workshop was concluded with a live presentation of the OAM by Irene Barbers (FZJ)."</span></span></p>

tag:tagteam.harvard.edu,2005:FeedItem/2488808 2019-08-16T08:56:01-04:00 2019-08-16T08:56:01-04:00

<p><span>... our new </span><span>Institutional</span><span> </span><span>Collections</span><span> offer personalised portals for academic and research institutes to showcase their research articles published </span><span>on</span><span> the platform. ...</span> <span>Institutional</span><span> </span><span>Collections</span><span> will form part of a new </span><span>F1000Research</span><span> programme of </span><span>Institutional</span><span> Membership Agreements, which allow institutions to directly pay </span><span>publishing</span><span> fees </span><span>on</span><span> behalf of authors. More than a pre-pay model, our </span><span>Institutional</span><span>Membership Agreements allow organisations to:</span></p> <ul> <li>Reduce administrative burden</li> <li>Promote open research ...</li> </ul>

tag:tagteam.harvard.edu,2005:FeedItem/2468808 2018-12-03T11:58:20-05:00 2018-12-03T11:58:20-05:00

<p>we are seeking an enthusiastic administrative assistant in our London office to support the Institutional Memberships team. ... We are collaborating with research institutions (libraries), research funders and consortia to improve the ways researchers are supported when publishing Open Access. ... This position will provide the successful candidate with an excellent opportunity to work in a thriving and international environment, and to learn about the rapidly changing transition of scientific publishing to Open Access</p> <p> </p>

tag:tagteam.harvard.edu,2005:FeedItem/2459567 2018-08-14T05:40:14-04:00 2018-08-14T05:40:14-04:00

<p><span>University’s Research and Innovation Committee agreed and accepted the San Francisco Declaration on Research Assessment (DORA) as part of a movement towards responsible use of research metrics</span></p>

tag:tagteam.harvard.edu,2005:FeedItem/2449970 2018-06-04T13:18:17-04:00 2018-06-04T13:54:31-04:00

<p>"The world of Open Access moves fast and it can be difficult to keep up. We run regular updates for our community here at Cambridge and following a recent webinar, figured a blog about it might be a good idea too. Strap yourselves in, this is a bumpy ride."</p>

tag:tagteam.harvard.edu,2005:FeedItem/2449969 2018-06-04T13:07:07-04:00 2018-06-04T13:07:07-04:00

<p><span>In addition to a centralised invoicing process that covers the publishing fees (article processing charges), researchers at participating organisations benefit from a discount. </span> <span>This is the first Nordic agreement of its kind and follows the Austrian Open Access framework publishing agreement between Frontiers, the Austrian Science Fund (FWF) and the University of Vienna in late 2017. </span> <span>The Agreement is open to all participating organisations of the Bibsam Consortium, which includes universities, university colleges and government-funded research institutions. Twenty organisations have already joined, including leading universities. All new participating organisations will benefit from the same terms and conditions, regardless of size or research output.</span></p>

tag:tagteam.harvard.edu,2005:FeedItem/2235158 2017-06-25T07:34:39-04:00 2017-11-01T15:08:40-04:00

<p>Google Translate:</p> <p>"2. Business models</p> <p>2a. Open Access Publication Fees; by Pieper, Dirk ; pages 77-86</p> <p>2b. Hybrid Open Access; by Mittermaier, Bernhard ; pages 87-93</p> <p>2c. Institutional Memberships; by Mittermaier, Bernhard ; pages 94-101</p> <p>2d. Contribution model (arXiv); by Tobschall, Esther ; pages 102-111</p> <p>2e. Knowledge Unlatched as a pioneer of a cooperative approach to enable Open Access; by Schimmer, Ralf ; pages 112-118</p> <p>2f. Cross-financing of Open Access and Print; by Fund, Sven ; pages 119-126</p> <p>2g. Freemium Open Access; by Green, Toby ; pages 127-136</p> <p>2h. Promotion of Open Access via institutional infrastructures, especially Repositories; by Oberländer, Anja ; pages 137-145</p> <p>2i. "Not for profit" Publishers of scientific institutions; by Meinecke, Isabella ; pages 146-154</p> <p>3. Financing strategies</p> <p>3a. Individual Accountant; by Scheiner, Annette ; pages 157-161</p> <p>3b. Open access publication fund; by Pampel, Heinz / Tullney, Marco ; pages 162-172</p> <p>3c. Open Access Transformation: The Replacement of the Subscription System by Open Access Business Models; by Schimmer, Ralf / Geschuhn, Kai ; pages 173-180</p> <p>3d. SCOAP3 - Golden Open Access in High Energy Physics; by Kutz, Angelika ; pages 181-189</p> <p>3e. Offsetting; by Geschuhn, Kai ; pages 190-196</p> <p>3f. Open Access in Consortial Perspective; by Schäffler, Hildegard ; pages 197-204"</p>

tag:tagteam.harvard.edu,2005:FeedItem/2235245 2017-06-25T14:14:15-04:00 2017-06-25T14:14:15-04:00

<p>[slides for talk by ElHassan ElSabry at OAI10-CERN Workshop on Innovations in Scholarly Communication, June 22, 2017, Geneva]</p>

tag:tagteam.harvard.edu,2005:FeedItem/2235170 2017-06-25T08:33:22-04:00 2017-06-26T08:50:38-04:00

<p>"Arguments against APC funding like the one above are both frequent and angry-sounding, and have been flowing in again from the <a href="https://twitter.com/search?q=%23oai10&amp;src=typd">OAI10 Conference in Geneva twitter feed</a>. They’re also problematic. The way the argument is put out suggests that the dichotomy is between APC-based Gold and Green OA. While it’s an understandable claim for more funding for Green OA-based infrastructure to which one is far from being unsympathetic, it follows a biased logic: </p> <p>[...]</p> <p>While fully respecting the demands for a more Green OA-friendly approach in research funder policies, my view is that since we happen to have this enormous opportunity that library-managed APC funding offers in terms of OA advocacy, it’s in everyone’s best interest to try to exploit it leaving aside controversies that divert the attention from the rather evident fact that it’s a co-existence of different models we’re clearly heading towards."</p>

tag:tagteam.harvard.edu,2005:FeedItem/2235167 2017-06-25T08:11:42-04:00 2017-06-25T08:11:42-04:00

<p><span>"Going beyond the TDM exception she outlined other impacts the proposal would have on research. For example, the EC proposes a new 20-years lasting 'neighbouring right' [for press publishers], which applies retroactively and can therefore cause problems even for already existing scholarly works. [The STM Association, also aiming to tighten conditions concerning the 'lawful access'-condition of the proposed TDM exception, aims to get this neighbouring right extended to STM publishers]. This new right would apply even to non-copyrighted works, which is one way how TDM activities could be affected by it. Her résumé: we are still far away from an improvement for Open Science.</span></p> <p><span>[...]</span></p> <p><span>The EC proposal is now to be discussed by the European Parliament and the Council of the EU, and another question during the Q&amp;A was about the Council's stand with regard to an EU-wide TDM exception, as expressed in the recent Council Conclusions. While the Conclusions endorse a broader exception by not limiting it to a particular type of beneficiary, it was pointed out that in the document it sounds like limited by type of content, which would be more like the French approach. However, this language might be just because those Conclusions are particularly about research and Open Science."</span></p>

tag:tagteam.harvard.edu,2005:FeedItem/2235159 2017-06-25T07:50:38-04:00 2017-06-25T07:50:38-04:00

<p><span>"First, this exemption has to be mandatory. Otherwise, EU member states will choose whether to include it in national law, leading to a patchwork of regulations and hampering collaborative research. This would be glaringly at odds with the harmonisation sought by EU copyright law and the goal of a digital single market.</span></p> <p><span>Second, both commercial and non-commercial research should be exempted. There is only a thin line between the two, rendering any distinction illusory. Big companies would benefit, but so would small companies and spinouts coming out of universities.</span></p> <p><span>Europe is often accused of being good at basic research but poor at commercialising it. Rules that limit commercial research will not make this situation better, and would violate research commissioner Carlos Moedas’s principle that EU legislation should be innovation-friendly.</span></p> <p><span>Third, the exception should apply to anyone with legal access to the content. The right to read must be the right to mine.</span></p> <p><span>Some publishers are taking advantage of the legal vacuum..."</span></p>

tag:tagteam.harvard.edu,2005:FeedItem/2235142 2017-06-25T06:19:32-04:00 2017-06-25T06:19:32-04:00

<p>Where the Commission proposes a protection of 20 years for the use of news snippets in a digital form, he extends it to 50 years, for both offline and online uses. Reciting a headline from the cold war era would suddenly require permission from the original publisher, who may have long since gone out of business. Where the Commission wants to apply this right to press publishers only, Mr. Arimont explicitly includes academic publishers, a move that would spell disaster for any open access initiatives.</p>

tag:tagteam.harvard.edu,2005:FeedItem/2235141 2017-06-25T06:07:28-04:00 2017-06-25T06:07:28-04:00

<p>Google Translate:</p> <p>"In the context of the unsatisfactory circumstances, the German scientific organizations joined forces to form a consortium in 2016 and pursue the goal of completing nationwide licensing agreements with major scientific publishers in the "DEAL" project. By pooling negotiation power, a "significant change is to be made against the current status quo in the negotiation, the content and the pricing". [...]</p> <p>Anyone with such high profit margins in the market has no reason to change his business model. The development of innovative and meaningful models would be stimulated precisely by the proposed amendment to the law, since the publishing companies would only have an incentive to develop a better offer. On the other hand, there is a lack of effective competition in the existing priority of contract offers. [...]</p> <p>The small economic success of most smaller publishing companies is actually a result of copyright: copyright creates a market where monopolistic competition prevails. One consequence of this is, for example, that a large part of the limited budget of the scientific libraries flows into the high profits of the large publishing houses - with the result that less is left for others. [...]</p> <p>If the current legal situation has not kept small and medium-sized publishers from concentration, why should this change with a continuing prevalence of licensing models? [...]</p> <p>Finally, if the profitability loss of smaller publishers is to be avoided by increasing the profits of the publishing industry (bigger cake), someone must pay for it. The "counter-financing" of higher profits by means of a license priority were then provided by scientific libraries, financed by tax credits. From the point of view of universities and libraries, this can only appear cynical."</p>

tag:tagteam.harvard.edu,2005:FeedItem/2235131 2017-06-25T03:42:42-04:00 2017-06-25T03:42:42-04:00

<p>We are seeking an enthusiastic commercial administrative assistant in our London office to support the Institutional Memberships Manager.</p> <p>In an effort to strengthen our connection with the research communities we serve and to centralize communications, Frontiers is working with libraries, funding agencies, and research consortia to find ways to support researchers directly. These relationships enable us to remove some or all of the responsibility for Article Publishing Fees from individual authors.</p> <p><strong>Responsibilities</strong></p> <ul> <li>Prepare weekly usage reports and verify invoicing with existing customers </li> <li>Provide customer service support answering inquiries from existing customers</li> <li>Assist accounting personnel as requested, adjusting invoices etc. </li> <li>Analyze data and prepare sales reports to support acquisition activities. </li> <li>Support sales activities through initial contact with new prospects and answering queries.</li> </ul>